Require Insurance In Flood Zones

The odds of a 100-year flood hitting in any particular year are so slim that property owners feel safe taking the gamble without flood insurance.

That has been the case in the Midwest, where only 10 percent of flooded homes and businesses had insurance to cover water damage and only half of the area's farmers had flood insurance for crops.

Facing a $10 billion federal relief bill, we all now will end up paying for the lackadaisical attitudes of a few.

In the upcoming months, Congress will take a hard look at its federal flood-insurance program. The insurance is required for anyone who borrows federally insured money to buy property in areas susceptible to flooding. But Congress should plug loopholes in federal flood-insurance laws, such as the one that allows those in flood-susceptible areas to get second mortgages on homes and business without insuring the property against flooding.

Since 1985, the insurance program has operated through private insurers solely on premiums and without any federal funds for payouts. And part of the insurance premiums go into better managing the floodplain by identifying and mapping areas susceptible to flooding.

Unfortunately, the premiums are too expensive for average homeowners and farmers. The average flood-insurance premium for homes and businesses is $320 a year, on top of regular insurance, which typically costs $300-$400 annually. How many property owners would gamble an extra $320 on the chance that a 100-year flood will occur in the next year?

Not many, unless they are forced to sign up. Farmers, likewise, are reluctant to pay what amounts to $3,111 annually for coverage of an average farm of 350 acres.

If Congress took stronger steps to require people to sign up for flood insurance, premiums would go down because the cost of the program would be spread among a greater number of people.

Mandating that those whose property is susceptible to flooding protect themselves would reduce the burden on federal disaster coffers and would benefit property owners. Consider that flood victims have no other recourse but to apply for federal disaster loans, which must be repaid. Those who can't qualify for loans might get the maximum grant of $11,900, if they are lucky. That, however, isn't even enough to replace a typical barn.

That only 10 percent of Midwestern flood victims had insurance is appalling, given that the national average for areas susceptible to flooding is 20 percent. So make it mandatory - if you're going to live where it floods, insurance is a must.